A specialist was
hired to develop and present a series of half-day training
seminars on empowerment and teamwork for the managers of a
large international oil company. Fifteen minutes into the
first presentation, he took a headlong plunge into the trap
of assumption. With great intent, he laid the groundwork for
what he considered the heart of empowerment-team-building,
family, and community. He praised the need for energy,
commitment, and passion for production. At what he thought
was the appropriate time, he asked the group of 40 managers
the simple question on which he was to ground his entire
talk: "What is the vision of your company?" No one
raised a hand. The speaker thought they might be shy, so he
gently encouraged them. The room grew deadly silent. Everyone
was looking at everyone else, and he had a sinking sensation
in his stomach. "Your company does have a vision,
doesn't it?" he asked. A few people shrugged, and a few
shook their heads. He was dumbfounded. How could any group or
individual strive toward greatness and mastery without a
vision? That's exactly the point. They can't. They can
maintain, they can survive; but they can't expect to achieve
greatness.

Mapes (1991)

SKY
Magazine

Vision is a widely used term, but not
well understood. Perhaps leaders don't understand what vision is,
or why it is important. One strategic leader is quoted as saying,
"I've come to believe that we need a vision to guide us, but
I can't seem to get my hands on what 'vision' is. I've heard lots
of terms like mission, purpose, values, and strategic intent, but
no-one has given me a satisfactory way of looking at vision that
will help me sort out this morass of words. It's really
frustrating!" (Collins and Porras 1991). To understand
vision, clarify what the term means.

DEFINING VISION

One definition of vision comes from
Burt Nanus, a well-known expert on the subject. Nanus defines a
vision as a realistic, credible, attractive future for [an]
organization. Let's disect this definition:

Realistic: A vision must
be based in reality to be meaningful for an organization.
For example, if you're developing a vision for a computer
software company that has carved out a small niche in the
market developing instructional software and has a 1.5
percent share of the computer software market, a vision
to overtake Microsoft and dominate the software market is
not realistic!

Credible: A vision must be
believable to be relevant. To whom must a vision be
credible? Most importantly, to the employees or members
of the organization. If the members of the organization
do not find the vision credible, it will not be
meaningful or serve a useful purpose. One of the purposes
of a vision is to inspire those in the organization to
achieve a level of excellence, and to provide purpose and
direction for the work of those employees. A vision which
is not credible will accomplish neither of these ends.

Attractive: If a vision is
going to inspire and motivate those in the organization,
it must be attractive. People must want to be part of
this future that's envisioned for the organization.

Future: A vision is not in
the present, it is in the future. In this respect, the
image of the leader gazing off into the distance to
formulate a vision may not be a bad one. A vision is not
where you are now, it's where you want to be in the
future. (If you reach or attain a vision, and it's no
longer in the future, but in the present, is it still a
vision?)

Nanus goes on to say that the right
vision for an organization, one that is a realistic, credible,
attractive future for that organization, can accomplish a
number of things for the organization:

It attracts commitment and
energizes people. This is one of the primary
reasons for having a vision for an organization: its
motivational effect. When people can see that the
organization is committed to a vision-and that entails
more than just having a vision statement-it generates
enthusiasm about the course the organization intends to
follow, and increases the commitment of people to work
toward achieving that vision.

It creates meaning in workers'
lives. A vision allows people to feel like
they are part of a greater whole, and hence provides
meaning for their work. The right vision will mean
something to everyone in the organization if they can see
how what they do contributes to that vision. Consider the
difference between the hotel service worker who can only
say, "I make beds and clean bathrooms," to the
one who can also say, "I'm part of a team committed
to becoming the worldwide leader in providing quality
service to our hotel guests." The work is the same,
but the context and meaning of the work is different.

It establishes a standard of
excellence. A vision serves a very important
function in establishing a standard of excellence. In
fact, a good vision is all about excellence. Tom Peters,
the author of In Search of Excellence, talks about
going into an organization where a number of problems
existed. When he attempted to get the organization's
leadership to address the problems, he got the defensive
response, "But we're no worse than anyone
else!" Peters cites this sarcastically as a great
vision for an organization: "Acme Widgets: We're No
Worse Than Anyone Else!" A vision so characterized
by lack of a striving for excellence would not motivate
or excite anyone about that organization. The standard of
excellence also can serve as a continuing goal and
stimulate quality improvement programs, as well as
providing a measure of the worth of the organization.

It bridges the present and the
future. The right vision takes the organization out
of the present, and focuses it on the future. It's easy
to get caught up in the crises of the day, and to lose
sight of where you were heading. A good vision can orient
you on the future, and provide positive direction. The
vision alone isn't enough to move you from the present to
the future, however. That's where a strategic plan,
discussed later in the chapter, comes in. A vision is the
desired future state for the organization; the strategic
plan is how to get from where you are now to where you
want to be in the future.

Another definition of vision comes
from Oren Harari: "Vision should describe a set of ideals
and priorities, a picture of the future, a sense of what makes
the company special and unique, a core set of principles that the
company stands for, and a broad set of compelling criteria that
will help define organizational success." Are there any
differences between Nanus's and Harari's definitions of vision?
What are the similarities? Do these definitions help clarify the
concept of vision and bring it into focus?

An additional framework for examining
vision is put forward by Collins and Porras. They conceptualize
vision as having two major components: a Guiding Philosophy,
and a Tangible Image. They define the guiding philosophy
as "a system of fundamental motivating assumptions,
principles, values and tenets." The guiding philosophy stems
from the organization's core beliefs and values and its purpose.

CORE BELIEFS AND VALUES

Just as they underlie organizational
culture, beliefs and values are a critical part of guiding
philosophy and therefore vision. One CEO expressed the importance
of core values and beliefs this way:

I firmly believe that any
organization, in order to survive and achieve success, must
have a sound set of beliefs on whichit premises all its
policies and actions. Next, I believe that the most important
single factor in corporate success is faithful adherence to
those beliefs. And, finally, I believe [the organization]
must be willing to change everything about itself except
those beliefs as it moves through corporate life. (Collins
and Porras 1991)

Core values and beliefs can relate to
different constituents such as customers, employees, and
shareholders, to the organization's goals, to ethical conduct, or
to the organization's management and leadership philosophy.
Baxter Healthcare Corporation has articulated three Shared
Values: Respect for their Employees, Responsiveness to their
Customers, and Results for their Shareholders, skillfully
linking their core values to their key constituencies and also
saying something about what is important to the organization. The
key, however, is whether these are not only stated but
also operating values.

Collins and Porras have provided
examples of core values and beliefs from a survey of industry
they conducted, and cite the following examples, among others:

About People

Marriott: "See the good in
people, and try to develop those qualities."

About Customers

L.L. Bean: "Sell good
merchandise at a reasonable price; treat your customers like
you would your friends, and the business will take care of
itself."

About Products

Sony: "We should always be
the pioneers with our products--out front leading the market.
We believe in leading the public with new products rather
than asking them what kind of products they want."

About Management and Business

Motorola: "Everything will
turn out alright if we just keep in motion, forever moving
forward."

PURPOSE

The second part of guiding philosophy
is purpose-why the organization exists, what needs it fills.
Collins and Porras believe a good purpose statement should be
"broad, fundamental, inspirational, and enduring."
Consider this purpose statement: "The purpose of the United
States Naval Academy at Annapolis, MD, is to prepare midshipmen
to become professional officers in the naval service."Or
this purpose statement from Apple Computer: "To make a
contribution to the world by making tools for the mind that
advance humankind." How do these statements of purpose stack
up?

Whether individual, team, organization
or nation, a sense of purpose and direction is essential to
commitment. A shared sense of purpose is the glue that binds
people together in common cause, often linking each individual's
goals with the organization's goals. Properly formulated, a
shared sense of purpose provides understanding of the need for
coordinated collective effort -- for subordinating individual
interest to the larger objective that can be achieved only by the
collective effort. When it is long range in nature, it is the
basis for detailed planning for the allocation of resources. When
it is noble and inspiring, it gives dignity and respect to those
participating in the effort. And, when it promises a better
future, it gives hope to all who seek it.

The second major component of vision
is tangible image. This is composed of a mission
and a vivid description. Mission is "a clear and
compelling goal that serves to unify an organization's effort. An
effective mission must stretch and challenge the organization,
yet be achievable" (Collins and Porras). There are four
ways of approaching developing a mission statement: targeting,
common enemy, role model, and transformation. Targeting means
developing your mission statement around a clear, definable goal.
An example is the mission Merck Pharmaceuticals set in 1979: To
establish Merck as the preeminent drug-maker worldwide in the
1980s. The common enemy approach is to focus the mission on
overtaking or dominating a rival. Athletic shoe, automobile, and
telecommuncations companies are all examples of areas where
competition with rivals dominates company missions. Role model
missions take an exemplar in another industry, and benchmark off
that exemplar. For example, a mission "To be the Microsoft
of retail sales companies" employs the role modeling
technique. Finally, the internal transformation approach mission
tends to focus on the internal remaking, restructuring, or
rebirth of an organization. One example of a transformational
mission might be the Army's recent efforts to transform itself
into a newer, leaner Army positioned for the 21st century.

This may be a good point to address
the confusion over the use of the terms purpose, mission and
vision. Collins and Porras view purpose and mission as components
of vision. Others, such as Nanus, differentiate between mission
and vision. Nanus states, "A vision is not a mission. To
state that an organization has a mission is to state its purpose,
not its direction." Further complicating the semantics,
different organizations may have mission statements, vision
statements, purpose statements, or all three. To take one
example, Quorum Health Group, Inc. a hospital management company,
differentiates between its mission and vision this way:

MISSION
STATEMENT

Quorum Health Group,
Inc., is a hospital company committed to meeting the needs of
clients as an owner, manager, consultant or partner through
innovative services that enhance the delivery of quality
healthcare.

VISION
STATEMENT

Quorum Health Group,
Inc., will be valued for its expertise in hospital management
and its ability to positively impact the delivery of quality
healthcare.

What are the differences between these
two statements? Note that the mission is oriented in the present
("QHG is a company . . ."), while the vision is
oriented in the future ("QHG will be valued . . .").
The mission states what QHG does in relatively concrete terms
(meet the needs of clients by providing services that enhance the
delivery of quality healthcare), while the vision states what it
wants to do in more idealistic terms (be valued for its expertise
and its ability to positively impact the delivery of quality
healthcare).

One final example may illustrate how
confused mission and vision can become. The Coca-Cola Company in
1994 published a booklet entitled "Our Mission and Our
Commitment." In that booklet, the company defines their
mission as follows:

We exist to create
value for our share owners on a long term basis by
building a business that enhances The Coca-Cola Company's
trademarks. This also is our ultimate commitment. As
the world's largest beverage company, we refresh that world.
We do this by developing superior soft drinks, both
carbonated and non-carbonated, and profitable non-alcoholic
beverage systems that create value for our Company, our
bottling partners, and our customers.

Does this sound like a mission, a
vision, or a combination of both?

In Collins and Porras's framework for
vision, their last element is a vivid description or
picture of the end state that completion of the mission
represents. They view this as essential to bringing the mission
to life. A vivid description gives the mission the ability to
inspire and motivate. Look back at the Coca-Cola Company mission
shown above. Does it paint a vivid description of completion of
the mission, or would The Coca-Cola Company have to amplify the
mission statement?

To put this all together, Collins and
Porras present the following framework:

core beliefs and
values + purpose = guiding philosophy

mission + vivid
description = tangible image

guiding philosophy +
tangible image = vision

Note that, as opposed to Nanus,
Collins and Porras do not focus on a vision statement, but on a
vision as consisting of elements shown above. It's worth
exploring the properties of a good vision. Nanus has several
guidelines for creating a realistic, credible, attractive future
for an organization:

PROPERTIES OF A GOOD VISION

A good vision is a mental model
of a future state. It involves thinking about the
future, and modeling possible future states. A vision
doesn't exist in the present, and it may or may not be
reached in the future. Nanus describes it like this:
"A vision portrays a fictitious world that cannot be
observed or verified in advance and that, in fact, may
never become reality" (emphasis added).
However, if it is a good mental model, it shows the way
to identify goals and how to plan to achieve them.

A good vision is idealistic.
How can a vision be realistic and idealistic at the same
time? One way of reconciling these apparently
contradictory properties of a vision is that the vision
is realistic enough so that people believe it is
achievable, but idealistic enough so that it cannot be
achieved without stretching. If it is too easily
achievable, it will not set a standard of excellence, nor
will it motivate people to want to work toward it. On the
other hand, if it is too idealistic, it may be perceived
as beyond the reach of those in the organization, and
discourage motivation. A realistic vision for that
software company might be to maintain their current
market share and produce instructional software that
meets quality standards. Realistic, yes; but inspiring?
No. A realistic yet also idealistic vision might be: To
become the industry leader in the development of
state-of-the-art instructional software products, known
for the quality and the innovativeness of their design.

A good vision is appropriate
for the organization and for the times. A
vision must be consistent with the organization's values
and culture, and its place in its environment. It must
also be realistic. For example, in a time of downsizing
and consolidation in an industry, a very ambitious,
expansionistic vision would not be appropriate. An
organization with a history of being conservative, and a
culture encouraging conformity rather than risk taking,
would not find an innovative vision appropriate. The
computer software company mentioned above, with a history
of producing high quality instructional software, would
not find a vision to become the industry leader in video
games or virtual reality software an appropriate one.

A good vision sets standards
of excellence and reflects high ideals.
Generally, the vision proposed above for the software
company does reflect measurable standards of excellence
and a high level of aspiration. The actual measure could
be the external reputation of the company, as assessed by
having users evaluate the company and its products.

A good vision clarifies
purpose and direction. In defining that
"realistic, credible, attractive future for an
organization," a vision provides the rationale for
both the mission and the goals the organization should
pursue. This creates meaning in workers' lives by
clarifying purpose, and making clear what the
organization wants to achieve. For people in the
organization, a good vision should answer the question,
"Why do I go to work?" With a good vision, the
answer to that question should not only be, "To earn
a paycheck," but also, "To help build that
attractive future for the organization and achieve a
higher standard of excellence."

A good vision inspires
enthusiasm and encourages commitment. An
inspiring vision can help people in an organization get
excited about what they're doing, and increase their
commitment to the organization. The computer industry is
an excellent example of one characterized by
organizations with good visions. A recent article
reported that it is not unusual for people to work 80
hour weeks, and for people to be at work at any hour of
the day or night. Some firms had to find ways to make
employees go home, not ways to make them come to work!
What accounts for this incredible work ethic? It is
having a sense of working organizations that are building
the future in a rapidly evolving and unconstrained field,
where an individual's work makes a difference, and where
everyone shares a vision for the future.

A good vision is well
articulated and easily understood. In order to
motivate individuals, and clearly point toward the
future, a vision must be articulated so people understand
it. Most often, this will be in the form of a vision
statement. There are dangers in being too terse, or too
long-winded. A vision must be more than a slogan or a
"bumper sticker." Slogans such as Ford Motor
Company's "Quality Is Job One" are good
marketing tools, but the slogan doesn't capture all the
essential elements of a vision. On the other hand, a long
document that expounds an organization's philosophy and
lays out its strategic plan is too complex to be a vision
statement. The key is to strike a balance.

A good vision reflects the
uniqueness of the organization, its distinctive
competence, what it stands for, and what it is able to
achieve. This is where the leaders of an
organization need to ask themselves, "What is the
one thing we do better than anyone else? What is it that
sets us apart from others in our area of business?"
A good example of a visioning process refocusing a
company on its core competencies is Sears. A few years
ago, Sears had expanded into areas far afield from its
original business as a retailer. Among other things,
Sears began offering financial services at their stores.
Poor performance led Sears to realize that they could not
compete with financial services companies whose core
business was in that area, so they dropped that service
and eliminated other aspects of their business not
related to retailing. Interestingly, Sears' primary
competitor is Wal-Mart, an organization with a very clear
and compelling vision. Sam Walton found a niche in
providing one stop shopping for people in rural areas,
and overwhelmed "Mom and Pop" stores with
volume buying and discounting. Wal-Mart is very clear
about their vision, and has focused on specific areas
where they can be the industry leader. The key is finding
what it is that your organization does best. Focus your
vision there.

A good vision is ambitious.
It must not be commonplace. It must be truly
extraordinary. This property gets back to the idea of a
vision that causes people and the organization to
stretch. A good vision pushes the organization to a
higher standard of excellence, challenging its members to
try and achieve a level of performance they haven't
achieved before. Inspiring, motivating, compelling
visions are not about maintaining the status quo.

DEVELOPING A VISION

At this point you should know what a
good vision consists of, and recognize a vision statement when
you see one. But how does a strategic leader go about developing
a vision for an organization? Nanus also offers a few words of
advice to someone formulating a vision for an organization:

Learn everything you can about
the organization. There is no substitute for a
thorough understanding of the organization as a
foundation for your vision.

Bring the organization's major
constituencies into the visioning process. This is
one of Nanus's imperatives: don't try to do it alone. If
you're going to get others to buy into your vision, if
it's going to be a wholly shared vision, involvement of
at least the key people in the organization is essential.
"Constituencies," refer to people both inside
and outside the organization who can have a major impact
on the organization, or who can be impacted by it.
Another term to refer to constituencies is
"stakeholders"- those who have a stake in the
organization.

Keep an open mind as you
explore the options for a new vision. Don't be
constrained in your thinking by the organization's
current direction - it may be right, but it may not.

Encourage input from your
colleagues and subordinates. Another injunction about
not trying to do it alone: those down in the organization
often know it best and have a wealth of untapped ideas.
Talk with them!

Understand and appreciate the
existing vision. Provide continuity if possible, and
don't throw out good ideas because you didn't originate
them. In his book about visionary leadership, Nanus
describes a seven-step process for formulating a vision:

1. Understand the organization.
To formulate a vision for an organization, you first must
understand it. Essential questions to be answered include what
its mission and purpose are, what value it provides to society,
what the character of the industry is, what institutional
framework the organization operates in, what the organization's
position is within that framework, what it takes for the
organization to succeed, who the critical stakeholders are, both
inside and outside the organization, and what their interests and
expectations are.

2. Conduct a vision audit.
This step involves assessing the current direction and momentum
of the organization. Key questions to be answered include: Does
the organization have a clearly stated vision? What is the
organization's current direction? Do the key leaders of the
organization know where the organization is headed and agree on
the direction? Do the organization's structures, processes,
personnel, incentives, and information systems support the
current direction?

3. Target the vision.
This step involves starting to narrow in on a vision. Key
questions: What are the boundaries or constraints to the vision?
What must the vision accomplish? What critical issues must be
addressed in the vision?

4. Set the vision context.
This is where you look to the future, and where the process of
formulating a vision gets difficult. Your vision is a desirable
future for the organization. To craft that vision you first must
think about what the organization's future environment might look
like. This doesn't mean you need to predict the future, only to
make some informed estimates about what future environments might
look like. First, categorize future developments in the
environment which might affect your vision. Second, list your
expectations for the future in each category. Third, determine
which of these expectations is most likely to occur. And fourth,
assign a probability of occurrence to each expectation.

5. Develop future scenarios.
This step follows directly from the fourth step. Having
determined, as best you can, those expectations most likely to
occur, and those with the most impact on your vision, combine
those expectations into a few brief scenarios to include the
range of possible futures you anticipate. The scenarios should
represent, in the aggregate, the alternative "futures"
the organization is likely to operate within.

6. Generate alternative visions.
Just as there are several alternative futures for the
environment, there are several directions the organization might
take in the future. The purpose of this step is to generate
visions reflecting those different directions. Do not evaluate
your possible visions at this point, but use a relatively
unconstrained approach.

7. Choose the final vision.
Here's the decision point where you select the best possible
vision for your organization. To do this, first look at the
properties of a good vision, and what it takes for a vision to
succeed, including consistency with the organization's culture
and values. Next, compare the visions you've generated with the
alternative scenarios, and determine which of the possible
visions will apply to the broadest range of scenarios. The final
vision should be the one which best meets the criteria of a good
vision, is compatible with the organization's culture and values,
and applies to a broad range of alternative scenarios (possible
futures).

IMPLEMENTING THE VISION

Now that you have a vision statement
for your organization, are you done? Formulating the vision is
only the first step; implementing the vision is much harder, but
must follow if the vision is going to have any effect on the
organization. The three critical tasks of the strategic leader
are formulating the vision, communicating it, and implementing
it. Some organizations think that developing the vision is all
that is necessary. If they have not planned for implementing that
vision, development of the vision has been wasted effort. Even
worse, a stated vision which is not implemented may have adverse
effects within the organization because it initially creates
expectations that lead to cynicism when those expectations are
not met.

Before implementing the vision, the
leader needs to communicate the vision to all the organization's
stakeholders, particularly those inside the organization. The
vision needs to be well articulated so that it can be easily
understood. And, if the vision is to inspire enthusiasm and
encourage commitment, it must be communicated to all the members
of the organization.

How do you communicate a vision to a
large and diverse organization? The key is to communicate the
vision through multiple means. Some techniques used by
organizations to communicate the vision include disseminating the
vision in written form; preparing audiovisual shows outlining and
explaining the vision; and presenting an explanation of the
vision in speeches, interviews or press releases by the
organization's leaders. An organization's leaders also may
publicly "sign up" for the vision. You've got to
"walk your talk." For the vision to have credibility,
leaders must not only say they believe in the vision; they must
demonstrate that they do through their decisions and their
actions.

Once you've communicated your vision,
how do you go about implementing it? This is where strategic
planning comes in. To describe the relationship between
strategic visioning and strategic planning in very simple terms, visioning
can be considered as establishing where you want the organization
to be in the future; strategic planning determines how to get
there from where you are now. Strategic planning links the
present to the future, and shows how you intend to move toward
your vision. One process of strategic planning is to first
develop goals to help you achieve your vision, then develop
actions that will enable the organization to reach these goals.

CONCLUSION

An organization must and can develop a
strategic plan that includes specific and measurable goals to
implement a vision. A comprehensive plan will recognize where the
organization is today, and cover all the areas where action is
needed to move toward the vision. In addition to being specific
and measurable, actions should clearly state who is
responsible for their completion. Actions should have milestones
tied to them so progress toward the goals can be measured.

Implementing the vision does not stop
with the formulation of a strategic plan - the organization that
stops at this point is not much better off than one that stops
when the vision is formulated. Real implementation of a vision is
in the execution of the strategic plan throughout the
organization, in the continual monitoring of progress toward the
vision, and in the continual revision of the strategic plan as
changes in the organization or its environment necessitate. The
bottom line is that visioning is not a discrete event, but rather
an ongoing process.

A FORMULA FOR VISIONARY LEADERSHIP

Burt Nanus sums up his concepts with
two simple formulas (slightly modified):

STRATEGIC
VISION X COMMUNICATION = SHARED PURPOSE

SHARED
PURPOSE X EMPOWERED PEOPLE X

APPROPRIATE
ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGES X STRATEGIC THINKING =

SUCCESSFUL
VISIONARY LEADERSHIP

Each one of the terms places unique
and special demands on the strategic leader. If you can put these
elements together in an organization, and you have a good vision
to start with, you should be well on the way to achieving
excellence. Collins and Porras affirm: "The function of a
leader-the one universal requirement of effective leadership-is
to catalyze a clear and shared vision of the organization and to
secure commitment to and vigorous pursuit of that vision."